Lady Orion, I have met him in person, and I think he is fine. My criticism is directed at the BNP's decision to capitulate, not at the person of Nick Griffin himself. It is entirely possible that he believes he is doing the best thing under the circumstances.

Obviously, I differ, but honest men may disagree about a wide variety of things in this world.

You failed to address either my points or my questions to you. First you say that they are only "altering the recipe," a mere adjustment. When I point out to you that racial integration is not an "alteration," you then say that you don't care, you support them regardless of what violence they do to their principles.

Fair enough, even if your intellectual integrity is as resolute as theirs. But let's not pretend that they haven't been politically gutted, whether you like it or not. They are finished because they were forced to withdraw from their principles. That is a ALWAYS a failed position as we shall soon see.

__________________

****** ******Money will buy a fine dog, but only kindness will make him wag his tail.

Oh, bull...Well, I think we would be suckers not to understand how one must play their hand when living under a near-totalitarian regime. I dare any of you calling into question Mr. Griffin's integrity to meet him in person and say it to his face. You simply do not know what this man is about nor do you understand the art of politics in both a totally hostile and dangerous environment. Certainly, we do not see any of you going the length that this man has gone, and so perhaps you can think a little longer before you point the finger.

You seem to be substituting stridency for the benefit of careful reading of posts and sound logic.

I know clearly what Griffin is about, and you seem not to understand how the BNP has been fatally wounded and politically raped. Please demonstrate your expertise in the art of politics by explaining how the BNP will maintain a nationalistic, whites only, immigration policy position while racially integrating their ranks, and how integration will aid their cause.

You seem to be substituting stridency for the benefit of careful reading of posts and sound logic.

I know clearly what Griffin is about, and you seem not to understand how the BNP has been fatally wounded and politically raped. Please demonstrate your expertise in the art of politics by explaining how the BNP will maintain a nationalistic, whites only, immigration policy position while racially integrating their ranks, and how integration will aid their cause.

As long as party policy continues to reflect positive (Nationalist) attitudes on immigration, culture, and race, it doesn't matter who joins. Obviously, this isn't the ideal situation, but the BNP doesn't live in a political vacuum. Our enemies are tyrants and will do what they can to hurt anyone that opposes them in the slightest. Their latest action was done to either bankrupt the BNP, or try to splinter support of the BNP among nationalists. Neither are acceptable, but they are in control.

It should be noted that all of this is being done because of the successes the BNP has scored against the establishment, however minor they might be.

The question is misframed. Per my sig., I do not believe the time is yet ripe for Rightist political parties. Most of them are riddled with gov't. agents, hobbled by P C laws, and are more of a liability than an asset.

When there is massive support for the Right as in the late Weimar era, then it will make sense to have a political party of the Right. Currently, there is only a small minority of people anywhere in the West that support a Rightist anything. Few of these are willing to make a major investment in time, effort, treasure or blood for any objectives sponsored by either the European or American Right.

This will likely remain the state of affairs until the current world rulers are unseated from their death-grip on the Press, Radio, Cinema, Television, and lastly, and perhaps most important of all--the Academy.

So to answer your question, I wouldn't do anything, because I would neither belong to nor head a Rightist party.

In any event, the question does not apply as I am an American, not a British Subject.

From Waaay Out West,

--HLM

__________________

As Serenity walked along the avenue, he saw many Functionaries that he recognized, but he didn’t dare say anything to, salute, or even look at them directly. Any such behavior could be interpreted as sexual harassment by the woman in question, and if a complaint were filed against him—well, that could mean weeks or months in a Rehabilitation Center.--Kevin Beary, Savaged States of America

Subscribing to both evolution and equality is intrinsically nonsensical--Vox Day

In view of the complete lack of spirituality, intellect, political awareness, and moral courage in the American population, the possibility of an American revolt against jewish domination has been entirely omitted. Such a thing is only a possibility after American jewry suffers a thorough military defeat, and even then only if it is followed by large-scale economic disasters--Francis Parker Yockey

You failed to address either my points or my questions to you. First you say that they are only "altering the recipe," a mere adjustment. When I point out to you that racial integration is not an "alteration," you then say that you don't care, you support them regardless of what violence they do to their principles.

Fair enough, even if your intellectual integrity is as resolute as theirs. But let's not pretend that they haven't been politically gutted, whether you like it or not. They are finished because they were forced to withdraw from their principles. That is a ALWAYS a failed position as we shall soon see.

Yes.

I'd like to expand on this a little--I believe that not only abandonment of principle is shown here, but also an unspoken admission that racial criteria for membership in a political party is somehow shameful.

In other words, the BNP is assuming their enemies correct in judging the British National Party as evil and filled with disreputable and hateful racists.

If a political party does not even have the strength of its own convictions, how can they possibly succeed?

etenim si incertam vocem det tuba
quis parabit se ad bellum?

--ad Corinthos I

for if the trumpet give an uncertain
sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?

Did Ron Paul make a fundamental tenet of his platform the nationalization of immigration policy to the exclusion of racial minorities? If he had, then bowed to pressure to integrate, I would say that his future would be diminished just as BNP's is likely to be. RP is able to achieve his objectives, integrated or not, and I support his objectives. His objectives are only a part of my total objectives, but they set the stage for carrying on, if achieved. BNP has effectively abrogated their stated principles, albeit with coercion.

I believe I've made it clear that I would enjoy seeing BNP's stated objectives, pre-integration, achieved. Unfortunately, they will now diminish because they have been compelled to surrender their chief defining characteristics, the fundamental reason that voters were attracted to them. They will not purify their country now, because they were not able to maintain their integrity of principle.

I agree. But the question is whether they can pursue such objectives, while racially integrating their ranks. Wouldn't it be equivalent to Don Black speaking out against race mixing, then marrying Janet Jackson?

I'm sorry, but what you're saying doesn't really make any sense. You supported a man who willfully accepted non-Whites into his ranks without a law stating that he had to do this. A man who was absolutely not making a White homeland even a fraction of his agenda as a politician. You eagerly supported this man, and then say that this support was more or less used as a stepping-stone approach. OK, no problem with that, but....you claim the BNP is dead now because they are forced to adopt a different approach. A stepping stone approach works when you decide to vote for a guy who willfully does something contrary to your views, but the stepping-stone is all but eliminated, and you claim the organization will be gutted, because the BNP is forced, by law, to accept changes. I would like to think that if supporters of the BNP had enough intelligence and integrity to go against PC brainwashing and vote for the party, then they should have enough intelligence to see that continuing unabashed support for their investment has the potential to gain much more than throwing up their arms and running for the hills.

As for their "stated principles", they have little to do with an actual political hand that has the clout to achieve those stated principles, or the financial backing to keep the party afloat if they decided to fight the law. This is one of those "so easy a caveman could do it" moments. You no have power, you no get anywhere near those "stated principles." Their only objective and defining principle at this point should be to gain power. Kiss some babies, shake some hands, suck a golf ball through a garden hose if you have to...hey, whatever it takes.

I've seen negative comments regarding this issue, and I've seen positive support and understanding for what the BNP is forced to do. Most of the negative comments seem to come from people who aren't associated with the BNP or from people that aren't even on the same freaking continent.

If someone is waiting for the perfect opportunity and organization to come along and save the day, then keep waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting...